Parklets are all the rage right now….they can be found in cities from Boston to San Francisco, from Chicago to Houston, and all kinds of cities and town in between. Basically, they are platforms that are built to occupy an existing street parking space or spaces – a parklet provides additional sidewalk space and seating space, and are often used for small meeting areas, for outdoor dining areas, and for places for pedestrians to rest and residents to linger in nice weather. In busy urban areas, they provide much needed space and help to pedestrianize streets and neighborhoods. There are many examples of parklets and there are many shapes and sizes, and they have many purposes. All of them abut the existing curb, all of them are parallel to the curb, and all of them are enclosed in some way or another to keep people in and (presumably) to keep intruding vehicles out. We think that parklets are a GREAT idea – they can be relaxing places, they can be money makers for small businesses, and they can change the dynamic of a neighborhood by giving pedestrians a reason to visit and a place to linger. They are a win-win for everybody – provided they are designed to protect the very people that are encouraged to sit and linger. People should never be targets. (Above photo courtesy of oneironaut11 via Instagram.) As you can see from the press coverage and video of the Los Angeles accident (HERE) a DUI vehicle impacted the end of a parklet that was being used for outdoor dining at a popular late night restaurant. Reports show that a diner, an employee, and a pedestrian were struck by debris and injured. All were taken to the hospital and all have been released. Significantly, the vehicle did not seem to strike any of the three – it was debris from the parklet itself and the planters around it that were propelled into the injured people. Basic design and basic safety principles seem to not have been taken into account by designers of this parklet. See our earlier post on the topic of SAFETY BY DESIGN. Vehicle impacts are probably some of the best studied events studied in the world of transportation. In terms of building a fixed structure subject to impact by a 5,000 LB vehicle traveling at street speeds (say 30 MPH) designers and safety engineers have three main tools to deal with the impact energy; absorb the energy using attenuating materials and designs; rigidize and secure the structure to make it stronger than the effects of the impact; or do some of both. This kind of approach can be seen in the design of modern cars and trucks. In a front end impact, the front area of the car crushes into itself, absorbing much of the impact energy. At some point, the crushing stops and the rigid cab of the vehicle remains as secure as possible to protect occupants, but if required, airbags deploy to attenuate the remaining energy that is pushing the occupants forward and into the rigid structure. From the video and press reports of this accident, more should have been done so that as the car struck the parklet and planters, those items were not propelled towards the seated customers by the front of the car. As is evident from the slide show below, whatever the car struck was easily propelled forward and into the seating area. As the photos show, this was very loosely constructed and not at all engineered structure – there is no sign of rigidity, no sign of being well-secured to the street or sidewalk, and the car simply pushed planters, decking, seating and railing in front of it until it came to a stop with its front wheels off the ground. Lives were saved NOT by good safety engineering, but by debris that piled up in front of the car – no wonder people were injured. The most obvious solution to the problem of parklets is to install inexpensive and effective safety barriers on sides exposed to oncoming traffic. It does not have to look like a castle or fortress, nor does it have to look uninviting. This approach stops the car BEFORE in comes in contact with the structure where people are sitting – simple, safe and proven. ASTM has a proposed standard for safety barriers in street and parking areas such as these, called WK13074. You can read all about it HERE. Steel bollards or barriers could easily have stopped that car before striking the parklet and the people – and done so for only a few thousand dollars. Either you stop the car just in front of the parklet, or you have to build the parklet so strong that it resists the impact. Either way, the facts are quite simple -- you either stop the car, or everyone sitting, standing, working or passing near the parklet is at risk at any time.SLIDE SHOW ( Photo credits and more information on the parklet damaged in this crash HERE)

Thanks to my friend Patrick Breen in Las Vegas for reminding me that there was more to the story than just the video of the truck crashing through the store (see previous blog post HERE.)While the video was very instructive, it does not tell you what the OUTSIDE of the store looked like, what direction the pickup truck came from, or what safety barriers (if any) the truck might have encountered before it slammed through the store.The answer: there was NOTHING between the road and the storefront that would have slowed that truck down even by a fraction of a mile per hour. As Patrick pointed out to me, there was nothing in front of the store to stop the truck, but they sure did have bollards around the power pole in the parking lot to protect at least one vulnerable fixed object.....I have put together a slide show to help give a clearer picture of what happened:

Thanks to KSAT 12 in San Antonio for their coverage of a simple accident that could have been much bigger news were it not for the effectiveness of a simple bollard.Last night at a Shell gas station in San Antonio a driver apparently fell asleep at the wheel when she was exiting from a freeway. Her car rolled through some road signs and into the gas station where it headed straight for one of the gas pumps. Fortunately for all concerned, this station was equipped with steel bollards installed directly in front of the gas pumps. When the SUV struck the bollard, the front of the vehicle absorbed much of the impact energy (as cars are designed to do) and it is reported that the driver was not seriously injured. It is unclear whether or not the airbags deployed on the vehicle, and while it is always hard to guess speed of impact from such limited information, I am going to just guesstimate from the damage that the SUV was traveling 20 to 25 MPH at the time it impacted the bollard.See the video HERE.What is clear was that a 6 inch diameter steel bollard, though scratched and leaning from the impact, stopped the moving vehicle and prevented the SUV from crashing through the gas pump. At the very least, there would have been a big, messy Hazmat cleanup; more often, fire erupts when gasoline flows out until the pump is shut off. If the woman was unconscious and no one could reach her in time, the fire would have been fatal.ASTM is completing work on a new test standard (WK13074) which takes on exactly this sort of threat scenario. With so many deaths and injuries from vehicle/pedestrian and vehicle/building interactions, more and more communities are calling for such bollards or barriers in certain parking lots near retail and commercial buildings and pedestrian areas. With no applicable performance standard to refer to, architects, engineers, or property owners have been having to choose products on their own, and therefore incurring liability in such instances. ASTM will provide local authorities and building and design professionals with a clear designation with which they can choose effective safety devices from a variety of manufacturers in a variety of materials and fabrications. See the ASTM website for more information HEREAs of this date the test standard will require that such safety bollards, barriers or other devices must be able to withstand an impact of 30MPH from a test vehicle that weighs 5,000 LBS -- in short, exactly what happened at this Shell gas station in San Antonio. The fact that bollards were installed in front of these gas pumps may have saved a life; going forward, many more lives will be saved by installation of such safety devices in other vulnerable locations.

It is important to know the crash resistance of a product before it is purchased and installed in order to protect people and property, particularly at a site like First Responders Park in Hilliard Ohio, near Columbus. Dedicated to the first responders and decorated with artifacts of stone and steel from the World Trade Center, the park is busy with bike riders and pedestrians and is beautifully laid out and designed.Unfortunately, it is not well protected. This was proven last night when a DUI driver in a small passenger car drove into the line of decorative bollards and sheered off or shattered four of them. A small passenger car hitting four proper steel bollards would have been stopped cold and the bollards maybe slightly damaged; these decorative bollards had no impact resistance whatever; they failed to stop the car and will now have to be replaced. See video coverage of the park and damage to the decorative bollards HERE.ASTM, the worldwide standards organization is in the final stages of completing a new test standard (WK 13074) which will provide engineers, architects, developers, property owners, and municipal or other governmental end-users with a clear and specific qualification for products and manufacturers of safety barriers for low speed (30 MPH) applications. Vehicle incursions, whether accidental or deliberate, put people at risk every day; more than sixty such crashes happen in the US every day, with thousands injured and hundreds killed every year.Specifiers, you need to be on notice -- if your intent is to separate people and property from inept or drunk or violent drivers; if you are going to install barriers in order to protect people where they live, work, play, or shop; if you want to comply with the emerging standard AND have a safer result for your project; if you want to protect yourself from future liability -- remember that "decorative" is for pretty, not for safety. The public sees decorative railings or pretty bollards such as the ones at this park and they make a presumption of personal safety, a presumption that is NOT based on the actual vehicle stopping capabilities of the product.There is plenty of good product out there that looks beautiful and has actual crash resistance -- your clients and your projects and your customers are depend on you to make better choices.

The press in Orange County Florida, scene of a recent fatal crash into a KinderCare day care center, is reporting that local officials are beginning the process to study the extent of various vulnerable locations in the area and to begin to look for "best practices" to use as the basis of a local ordinance requiring safety barriers at such facilities. (For excellent coverage, see the Orlando Sentinel coverage HERE.)As readers of this blog and the many members of the Storefront Safety Council LinkedIn group are aware, these types of crashes are very common. With regard to the efforts of city and county officials to determine what types of barriers might be effective, affordable, and suitable for inclusion in any local ordinance that they may consider, I suggest a review of the information included in these pages, as well as that which is available on the Storefront Safety Council website. In addition, there is additional information available for review in Standardization News, the magazine for ASTM International. ASTM is in the process of finalizing a test standard for low-speed (non-highway) barriers and bollards which would be suitable for applications such as day care centers, medical clinics, senior centers, and other exposed facilities. For information on the Low Speed Vehicle Barrier standard see the ASTM article HERE.I first advocated for the creation of this standard seven years ago; it was very apparent that the standards and engineering that were applied to anti-terrorist barriers and highway safety barriers were not appropriate for applications in front of strorefronts, restaurants, and child care centers. As our research continued and we began to get a better handle on how frequent these crashes are and the extent of the monetary damages, injuries, and fatalities that resulted from them, others in the industry stepped up to take this problem on. To their credit, ASTM agreed that this was a suitable area of study and an area in need of regulation. As the Orlando Sentinel report shows, there is not at this time a national standard for either the types of barriers to be deployed, or the types of places where they should be required. This proposed standard goes a long way to making a national standard practical.Here is an excerpt from the introduction for the proposed standard:"A majority of applications for barriers is to protect people or property from accidental or intentional vehicle incursions. One example is protecting pedestrians or students from vehicles on adjacent surface streets. Another example is protecting store fronts or mall entrances from vehicles which might approach at high speed due to operator pedal error. Anti-ram and security applications also need to be addressed, for those times when vehicles are employed as a means to gain illegal access. Currently no testing standards exist, and consequently, specifiers do not know what type of products to deploy and how to qualify either a product or a manufacturer. As a result, the public is left undefended in too many instances." Full text can be found HERE.The science of vehicle barriers is well known, and the engineering is not difficult. There is no need to spend fortunes and there is no need to turn the front of buildings into fortresses. Preventing vehicle incursions is something that is done efficiently, effectively and affordably every day in retail areas, school campuses, pedestrian areas, and commercial and municipal buildings. I applaud the efforts in Orange County to find best practices, and after a determination, to enact an ordinance that requires such safety measures in front of at-risk facilities. I would just remind everyone that storefront crashes like the one at KinderCare happen 50 to 60 times EVERY DAY. Please do your research, make your determinations, and get your ordinance in place. Kids, teachers, and parents are at risk every day until you do.And it doesn't have to be that way.

Professional Safety Magazine is out with a very timely article about Prevention Through Design (PTD.) This is a professional movement that the American Society of Safety Engineers and other bodies are very interested in. Driven in part by common sense and in part by liability claims, the premise is that the best time to incorporate safety and reduce risk and hazards is in the design phase of a project, whether it is as a new build or renovation.The concept clearly applies to the problem of storefront crashes; drivers are going to make pedal errors, or have medical emergencies, or drive drunk. Pointing cars at store entrances as they drive down the drive aisles of a parking lot (as happened in several recent grocery store incidents reported in these pages) or having nose-in parking pointed right at store windows and glass doors (as with most convenience stores and strip malls) is inviting accidents and injuries into your projects.Protecting pedestrians, customers, and employees at retail stores, restaurants, and commercial buildings where these types of design issues are present needs to become a higher priority -- as recent litigation and liability claims have proven. The cost of redesigning parking areas and traffic flow, or simply by installation of tested barriers or bollards, is all that is required to transform your store or project from exposed to protected -- and to keep architects and engineers and property owners in their offices and out of lawyers offices.Here is an excerpt of this excellent article. Thanks to ASSE and Professional SafetyGetting Started With Prevention Through Design By Marjory E. Anderson & Craig Galecka If you ask someone in the safety profession, "Do you want to reduce risk and save money at the same time?" the answer is always a resounding "yes." That is why the concept of prevention through design (PTD) has gained so much momentum in the past few years. PTD is an invaluable tool that allows organizations to address safety measures early in the design process, which has proven to decrease risk and save money. Risk is minimized by eliminating hazards before they are created and applying solutions that are high in the hierarchy of controls. Costs are reduced in two ways: 1) by applying the initial solution; and 2) by minimizing injuries, reducing claims and decreasing lost production time.READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE

Copyright 2018 by Rob Reiter. All rights reserved. Content may be freely copied and distributed subject to inclusion of this copyright notice and our World Wide Web URL http://www.storefrontcrashexpert.com.